Personality, belief in a just world, and attitudes toward criminal responsibility defenses: a preliminary study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose In Canada, if it can be proven that a defendant was suffering from a mental disorder at the time they committed an offense, they can be found Not Criminally Responsible on Account of Mental Disorder (NCRMD). These cases are often decided by jury. The purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of the dark triad (DT), social dominance orientation (SDO) and belief in a just world (BJW) on undergraduate students’ attitudes toward the NCRMD defense. Design/methodology/approach A total of 421 undergraduate students completed questionnaires measuring SDO and the DT. After being primed for high, low or neutral BJW, they indicated their attitudes toward NCRMD. Findings The BJW manipulation had no effect on attitudes. High-SDO/DT participants held less favorable attitudes toward NCRMD than participants who scored low on these variables, F(1, 420)=20.65, p <0.01, <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <m:msubsup> <m:mrow> <m:mi>η</m:mi> </m:mrow> <m:mrow> <m:mi>p</m:mi> </m:mrow> <m:mrow> <m:mn>2</m:mn> </m:mrow> </m:msubsup> <m:mo>=</m:mo> <m:mn>0.05</m:mn> </m:math> . Psychology and criminology students had significantly more favorable attitudes toward NCRMD than business students. Practical implications This study can be helpful in improving jury impartiality in trials involving mental illness and criminal responsibility; assessment of SDO and the DT; awareness of career roles relating to insanity defense bias; and improving the voir dire process. Originality/value The results of this study may be used to improve the voir dire process in trials involving the issue of mental illness and criminal responsibility and to preserve the impartiality of the jurors selected for these trials.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".